So I've been reading a lot about this nowdays. Sometime I feel my teeth a bit sensitive the past few weeks, maybe my diet is not really balanced either, but I've red that not consuming any fluoride can make teeth sensitive and on time it's going to deminerilaize. Lot of topics say it's a really protection to the teeth, some say it's a realy bad poison. I use now a fluoride free toothpaste. What is your opinion on this one?

Another question, does xylitol really helps protect teeth too?

_________________"Go vegan and no body gets hurt"
HEALTHY PEOPLE ROCK
"milk is for babies"

I doubt I would have any teeth left without my fluoride toothpaste. I tried the Tom's non-fluoride toothpaste, but my teeth quickly developed cavities and pain. I also take a fluoride rinse to keep my teeth better protected.

More importantly, there has been no scientific study showing causative negative effects of fluoride in toothpaste. There are some groups out there that like to make many claims about whether or not fluoride is dangerous, and quite frankly, they have no scientific evidence to support their claims.

There is some indication that xylitol may inhibit growth of some tooth-decaying bacteria, but there is also no support that xylitol in toothpaste will prevent cavities. Xylitol and fluoride are very different, and have very different properties, so their effects in the body will be quite different.

_________________Learning how to be compassionate, gain wisdom, and love life.

Fluoride damages teeth Much research from many parts of the world has suggested that, far from protecting teeth, fluoride actually damages them. One of the largest studies into fluoride levels and dental caries ever carried out comes from Japan. In this study, researchers at Tokyo Medical and Dental University examined the teeth of 20,000 students and showed clearly that they had been harmed by fluoride. The researchers compared students who came from areas with more than 0.4 parts per million fluoride in the drinking water with those whose water contained less than 0.4 ppm. Their results showed clearly that there was significantly more decay in the areas that had the higher levels of fluoride. Note that the 0.4 ppm that was harming teeth is less than half the "optimal" level. Similarly another study, conducted in Ottawa, Kansas, to assess the effects of adding fluoride to the town's water found that fluoridation was a disaster: in the first three years of drinking fluoridated water, the numbers of DMFT in 5- to 6-year-old children more than doubled, while the numbers free from decay nearly halved.

That fluorides have not been shown to benefit teeth should not come as a surprise to the dental profession. As long ago as 1940, it was suggested that seventy percent of the caries in children was in the form of pits and fissures. Recent reports indicate that today, eighty-three per cent of all caries in North American children is of this type. And there is no reason to suppose that children in other Western countries are any different. Pit and fissure cavities are prevented with sealants, they aren"t preventable with fluoride.

Fluoridation is stopped — and teeth get better The town of Kuopio, in eastern Finland, was fluoridated in 1959. But owing to strong opposition by different civic groups, water fluoridation was stopped at the end of 1992. It was a perfect opportunity to examine the consequences of this discontinuation on dental health. If the theory that fluoride prevented caries was correct, then discontinuing fluoridation should lead to increases in caries. To test this, in 1992 and 1995, independent random samples of all children aged 6, 9, 12 and 15 years were drawn from Kuopio with a nearby low-fluoride town, Jyvaskyla, whose distribution of demographic and socio-economic characteristics was fairly similar to Kuopio's acting as the control group. Dental caries was registered clinically and radiographically by the same two calibrated dentists in both towns.

In 1992 the mean DMFS values were lower in the fluoridated town for the two older age groups but no meaningful differences for the two younger age groups. In 1995, the only difference with possible clinical significance was an eighteen percent reduction found in the 15-year-olds in fluoridated Kuopio. In that year, a decline in caries was seen in the two older age groups in the non-fluoridated town.

In spite of water fluoridation having ceased, there was no indication of any increasing trend of caries in Kuopio.

The researchers considered that, perhaps, caries were prevented by better or more aggressive dental care. But in fact the numbers of fluoride varnish and sealant applications had decreased sharply in both towns. The researchers conclude that there was no evidence that the cessation of water fluoridation was having a detrimental effect and the decline of caries in the two towns had little to do with professional preventive measures performed in dental clinics.

_________________"Go vegan and no body gets hurt"
HEALTHY PEOPLE ROCK
"milk is for babies"

Yea I've got something against a classified neurotoxin being added to water that bioaccumulates. It just doesn't make sense if your source of water is tap water that's fluoridated and your whole family drinks it, isn't it possible that one member may be getting too much . I'm really against it being added to water and in the end just like every other government interaction on health, there's money to be made from it.

I'm still really curious. Over the past months my teeth started to get sensitive. I'll try out Elmex toothpaths because everybody is raving about them how good they are and see what will happen. Also maybe my diet isn't the best, I'm trying to eat a good variety but I'm feeling I'm missing something, but my blood tess always come out good.

Veghead25, de you eat your greens mostly raw or cooked?

_________________"Go vegan and no body gets hurt"
HEALTHY PEOPLE ROCK
"milk is for babies"

All the sudden I know what they mean over at Vegan Fitness when they say "take it to VBB."

Wow, I was a little surprised to see this. From my experience, the folks here at VBB are much more open minded and less confrontinal and MUCH MORE concerned about fitness, health and nutrition than over there. Actually, some there admitted they had no concern about their health at all. Really, I am not sure why they even have the words "fitness" and "healthy" in their title/subtitle.

Sorry, I don't mean to bash other vegan websites on here. But if they are saying to "take it to VBB" sounds like the bashing has already been going on. I would say if someone wanted to learn more about health to bring it to VBB.

All the sudden I know what they mean over at Vegan Fitness when they say "take it to VBB."

Wow, I was a little surprised to see this. From my experience, the folks here at VBB are much more open minded and less confrontinal and MUCH MORE concerned about fitness, health and nutrition than over there. Actually, some there admitted they had no concern about their health at all. Really, I am not sure why they even have the words "fitness" and "healthy" in their title/subtitle.

VBB is also way too credulous and anti-science at times. Too much holistic crap and anecdotes, not enough real, verifiable evidence.

It's just irritating because veganism already makes lots of people (most people?) think hippie-dippie, crystals and vibrations, homeopathy and wheatgrass.

="blabbate VBB is also way too credulous and anti-science at times. Too much holistic crap and anecdotes, not enough real, verifiable evidence.

All I can say is this hasn't been my personal experience, actually just the opposite. I haven't been on VF in a long time after I was treated rudely by many there including some moderators. They point blank told me that they didn't care about their health and that wasn't what veganism was all about. I understand that many, maybe most(?) vegans become vegans for other reasons besides health, which is fine. But if that is the case, then why put "fitness" and "health" in the title of their website.

Maybe, I wasn't around long enough and missed some of their discussions on science since I was hated on from the get go over there.

I don't intend to turn this thread into a flame war between VF and VBB and highjack the thread from the original topic. So to contribute to the thread topic, for what it's worth, even Dr.Fuhrman, who bases everything he believes on the available science, is leary of fluoride and I don't think he uses it personally.

="blabbate VBB is also way too credulous and anti-science at times. Too much holistic crap and anecdotes, not enough real, verifiable evidence.

All I can say is this hasn't been my personal experience, actually just the opposite. I haven't been on VF in a long time after I was treated rudely by many there including some moderators. They point blank told me that they didn't care about their health and that wasn't what veganism was all about. I understand that many, maybe most(?) vegans become vegans for other reasons besides health, which is fine. But if that is the case, then why put "fitness" and "health" in the title of their website.

Oh yeah, I'm not going to defend VF. They're just as bad, probably worse. But VBB can be nearly as maddening.

Did others experiment with non-fluoridated totohpaste and after trying fluridated?

I noticed I have white spots on my front teeth. Wich can't be fluorosis because they are there for about a year, I've red that this is the symptoms of the tooth demineralisation?I have been using non-fluoridated toothpast for at least 2 years now. Could be tis the cause of this? Also I don't know if my diet is well balanced enough. How do you get your daily 1000mg of calcium through only diet? Without supplements?

_________________"Go vegan and no body gets hurt"
HEALTHY PEOPLE ROCK
"milk is for babies"

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum